Thank you for clarifying what occurred. I was one of the four skiers, and the backcountry community may like to hear more. First of all, though, let me say that I, like all backcountry users, completely appreciate the work and quick response of NSR. I am not at all critical of you! Given what occurred, your response sounds appropriate. The value judgment that Tim Jones closes with though, that Grouse acted appropriately, I cannot disagree with more strongly.
I have skied Grouse (and a lot of other places) for years, and am on their pro team. The first thing to know is that last year I hiked Thrasher Creek and took GPS coordinates of the area. I also studied maps and photographs. Finally, I had a conversation with a senior Grouse management person and told him I wished to ski the backside of the mountain this year. (Who this was will for the time being remain private.) I was given permission, as long as I kept it quiet - no pictures and stories of how to get there on the internet - that sort of thing.
We did not ignore any ski patrol. If any were calling to us we had no idea. We thought we entered the area when no one could see us. There are a lot of beginners at Grouse and having someone follow us was the last thing we wanted.
We had beacons, three shovels between four of us and three sets of probes.
I have a lot of respect for CAC, but our assessment of avalanche danger on site was and remains Moderate.
The Thrasher Creek area is very difficult skiing, and the line we had chosen was a particularly hard pillow line. We skied it with no incident.
At the end, we had intended to hike out the pipeline exit to Mountain Highway, which we did. As far as I am aware, no rescuer came into the area.
What should have been put down as a minor misunderstanding has taken on a life of its own. Hopefully it will give rise to better communication in the future.
By graham haywood, at 10:29 AM
on this story.
